Yasheng Huang makes an excellent point about Trump’s ignorance and indifference to science and technology. He says, “the enemy of American innovation is not trade or Made in China 2025. The real enemy is American leaders’ own lack of vision.” In this regard there may not be another “Sputnik” moment on his watch. In October 1957 the US woke up one morning to the reality that the Soviet Union had succeeded in launching a satellite called Sputnik 1 into space, whose job was to send messages back to Earth via radio signals, which had never been done before. It was the first man-made object to go into orbit around the Earth. Not long after the successful launch of Sputnik 1, the USSR launched Sputnik 2 in November. This one had a passenger on board - Laika the dog. She was picked from 10 dogs and became the first living thing sent into orbit, paving the way for human space travel.Suddenly the US felt threatened and the political system came together. For many years, the USA and the USSR were in a race to conquer the space. In response to the Sputnik launch the Americans were determined to catch up and invested heavily in rocket technology, research, and education. The government “poured money into programs to strengthen American students’ skills in math and science.” In 1958, NASA was created with the blessing of President Dwight Eisenhower and the US launched its own satellite, Explorer 1. President Kennedy promised to send an American to the moon, and space travel has continued to grow ever since, leading to the creation of the International Space station in 1998. The author says, “it is not an exaggeration to say that government policies in this period laid the foundation for decades of US dominance in global science and technology development.” Eventually the US and the USSR decided to work together.As part of the ongoing trade dispute the Trump administration seeks to address the intellectual property theft that it alleges Chinese firms have benefited from. Beijing’s “Made in China 2025” programme, President Xi Jinping’s multi-billion dollar plan to help transform its high-tech industries like aerospace, robotics, pharmaceuticals, and machinery into world leaders by 2025, is seen as a threat to Trump’s trade goals. He wants to reduce trade deficits and promote his “Made in America.” The author understands America’s “concern” with Made in China 2025, and sees China’s “approach to technology development” as controversial. He has two “better ways to respond to China’s policies.” But he seeks to point out the failures and mistakes on both sides that have been responsible for the standoff and urges both parties to get their act together in an effort to reduce tensions, like the US and the USSR, whose cooperation ultimately brought the Cold War to an end. “First, America and other trade partners must continue to confront China on its intellectual-property (IP) violations and market-access inequities. Under free-market competition, one country’s successes in science and technology should not come at others’ expense.” As China has “a deep pool of talent,” it has “much to contribute to progress in science and technology; the world should welcome China’s efforts to innovate. But the terms of competition and development must be market-conforming, not market-distorting.” However, the Americans “should focus... on getting the rules of the game right, rather than stopping Chinese innovation per se.” The author says, while China “develops its innovative capabilities, the US must invest more in its own science and technology base.” Instead of loathing and dreading this “Made in China 2025” one should see it as another “Sputnik moment” for America to boost its cutting-edge technology.But Trump has no interest in moving the country forward by encouraging innovation and investing in R&D. In order to garner votes from miners, steel and oil rig workers etc, he goes back to dirty fuels like coal, that are linked to the first Industrial Revolution, rather than promoting solar, wind, and other renewables that will fuel the “Fourth Industrial Revolution.” The author says Congress is also responsible for the inertia, allowing federal spending on R&D to decline and the education system to deteriorate steadily. While the tax legislation passed by the Republican-controlled Congress in December 2017 benefits the rich, it “imposes an unprecedented tax on those university endowments valued at over $500,000 per student.” This will have an impact on major research centres to maintain a “competitive advantage.” The author says “innovation hates a vacuum: If the US fails to boost its support for science and technology, other countries should and will fill the void.” Perhaps Trump – in his limited cognitive ability – does realise that he won’t be able to “make America great again.” Instead he seeks to prevent other countries from being greater or stronger than America.

This interesting idea raises two very pressing questions: First, why is America in 2018 not like America in 1959? (Robert Putnam's study "Our Kids: The American Dream in Crisis" picks the same 1959 starting date against which to compare our current culture of rampant inequality and lack of foresight). The differences in social trajectories during the two periods are dramatic.

The second question is, Will China's historical attachment to the fundamental value of academic achievement make it more suited for a competitive society in the 21st century? While the US likes science for how it feeds into business (and ultimately profits), China has been stuck on academic achievement as an end in itself since the ancient institution of the Confucian civil service examinations. If it weren't for self-inflicted restrictions on information flows and the brain drain they cause, Chinese culture would likely turn out more unexpected innovations than the entire West combined, as it once did.

New Comment

Pin comment to this paragraph

After posting your comment, you’ll have a ten-minute window to make any edits. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.

Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Log in

Register

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. If your email exists in our system, we'll send you an email with a link to reset your password. Please note that the link will expire twenty-four hours after the email is sent. If you can't find this email, please check your spam folder.